[EM] Poll on voting-systems, to inform voters in upcoming enactment-elections

[Richard Lung]

Some comments about this voting methods poll seem to be in order.

A referendum on voting methods is paradoxical, because you have to know 
good method, in order to find it. It's standard scientific method, 
explained by HG Wells over a century ago, that voting method is not a 
matter of opinion but a matter of demonstration.

This opinion poll would access the views of list members but it also 
shows the disconnect with voters of the world, judging by the list of 
options, mentioned by Kristofer. The caution by, or attributed to, 
Werner Heisenberg is worth mentioning again: if you cannot at last come 
back and explain wat it is you have found, all your finding has been 
worthless.

Social choice theory has had 70 years to do this. They held a 50 year 
celebration, at turn of 2000. Where is their standard model of election 
method? Or is it an "Impossibility" in their fallible opinion? Their 
insisting on the Anglo-American single member system is a case of: what 
is may not be what's right (as David Hume said, and half the world seems 
not to think so). Single member elections automatically halve 
representation, its most inefficient form: "only half a democracy" 
(Roert Newland). Compared to that, all the tweaks to single member 
systems are insignificant, and not calculated to promote democratic 
reform or progress. Only a Dr Pangloss would suggest this is the best of 
all possible democratic worlds.

Regards,

Ricchard Lung.


On 07/04/2024 01:02, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
> On 2024-04-06 18:55, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
>> Well I nominate Kristofer to administer the poll.  Michael, if you 
>> are plonking people or vise versa, it might not be as good for you to 
>> administer the poll.
>>
>> There seems to be a whole shitload of alternatives.  But a good 
>> method can handle that.
>
> Since Michael Garman also said MO shouldn't be running this poll, if 
> there are no other suggestions, I'd like to administer it.
>
> I've unblocked the two people I got plonked. But someone should 
> probably tell MO about the change because I think he's got me plonked, 
> since the lists I've seen since I unblocked him don't contain my 
> suggestions.
>
> I would also suggest merging the Condorcet-IRV hybrids into a 
> Smith-IRV category. While Condorcet methods can handle lots of 
> alternatives, it's easier to fill out a poll with fewer alternatives. 
> But if you'd prefer having the full unabridged list, that's okay by me 
> too. Alternatively we could remove just Schwartz-Woodall.
>
> If anybody else has merge ideas, just lemme know. The most obvious 
> candidates would be combining Copeland//Borda and Black.
>
> And of course, if MO also wants to count the votes too (based on what 
> posts he get), I'm not going to stop him - the mailing list posts are 
> public, after all.
>
> The current methods are:
>
> Approval
> RP(wv)
> Schulze
> IRV
> Plurality
> Majority Judgement (as a category; includes usual judgement etc.)
> Approval with manual runoff
> Copeland//Borda (also called Ranked Robin)
> MinMax(wv)
> Black
> STAR
> Smith//Score
> Baldwin
> Benham
> Woodall
> Schwartz-Woodall
> Smith//Approval (implicit - of all ranked)
> Smith//Approval (explicit - specified approval cutoff)
> Margins-Sorted Approval
> Smith//DAC
> Margins-Sorted Minimum Losing Votes (equal-rated whole)
>
>
> The nomination deadline is 2024-04-11 05:14:59 UTC, inclusive. (Not 
> like we're going to need to be accurate down to the second, but there 
> we go.)
>
> -km
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list 
> info